As many people in Portland and the region may be aware, the Portland harbor stretch of the Willamette River is highly polluted in both its river sediments and upland areas. The pollutants include mostly legacy substances, including PCBs, heavy metals, DDE (a derivative of DDT) and oil-based products. As such, the river was listed as a federal Superfund site in December 2000. The polluted area stretches from near downtown Portland almost to the Columbia River, some 11 river miles.

In recent months a key milestone was reached with the issuance of the feasibility study for the harbor, essentially an assemblage of cleanup options for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the local community to consider. This document paves the way for the final record of decision that will outline the specific cleanup plan for the harbor. Although this represents some progress, not all is well in this process.

On June 22, the EPA sent a letter to the Lower Willamette Group, a collection of parties -- including river industries, the city of Portland and the Port of Portland -- that are responsible for much of the contamination and cleanup. The letter strongly criticized one of the reports that this group is responsible for producing, known as the baseline human health risk assessment. The EPA criticized the report for "several instances of incorrect or misleading information," failure to make changes previously required by the EPA, and failure to "present the process and information in a clear and transparent manner that would allow anyone outside those intimately involved in the development of this assessment to follow and understand." The EPA threatened substantial fines if these previously identified deficiencies are not remedied quickly.

The LWG responded by requesting more time and indicating that it may invoke a dispute resolution process with the EPA. The irony here is that many of the groups now seeking delay are the same groups that have regularly complained about the length of the Superfund process.

This recent issue has led us to the conclusion that the mindset of those responsible for cleaning up Portland harbor must change. What started out more than a decade ago as a "collaborative" approach has turned into a situation in which certain parties who are responsible for cleaning up the pollution in the river seem to want to stretch out the clock and find ways to minimize their financial contribution to the cleanup.

In our view, these entities owe it to their neighbors -- those who fish and consume fish from the river, those who recreate along the river, and those who simply care about the cleanliness and health of the river -- to put aside the strategic and legal positioning, and instead do what is right as fellow community members who care about the river.

Yes, the cleanup actions to remove contaminated sediment will take significant investment. Yet the silver lining for this investment is that according to a recent study done by the city of Portland, each dollar put into the cleanup will generate more than a dollar in return locally -- meaning the cleanup will actually be good for the river and the economy.

As members of this community, we believe that the EPA is doing right by the Willamette and that those responsible for cleaning up some share of the river's pollution have a golden opportunity to do what is right for the river and our community. Travis Williams is executive director of Willamette Riverkeeper. Bob Sallinger is the conservation director of the Audubon Society of Portland.